|
06 Nov 07 - 12:41 AM (#2187277) Subject: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Ron Davies Gisele Bundchen says: Don't pay me in dollars. She insists on euros. Now there's one savvy model. Wave of the future? |
|
06 Nov 07 - 01:19 AM (#2187290) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Richard Bridge Who? |
|
06 Nov 07 - 02:13 AM (#2187296) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: JohnInKansas "Gisele Bundchen tops Forbes.com's 2007 list of The Top Earning Models in the World, raking in $33 million, more than triple the $9 million banked by Kate Moss, who came in second." John |
|
06 Nov 07 - 06:50 AM (#2187392) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Bainbo Is a model who wears clothes for people? Or a "model" who takes them off for people? |
|
06 Nov 07 - 09:46 AM (#2187460) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: catspaw49 Does it matter? Neither is worth it!!! Spaw |
|
06 Nov 07 - 11:37 AM (#2187565) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Stilly River Sage Think of some of the folks who started as models: Lauren Bacall, Suzy Parker, Jessica Lange, Blondie, Brooke Shields, Lauren Hutton, Marilyn Monroe, etc. SRS |
|
06 Nov 07 - 11:41 AM (#2187567) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Peace They all begin to look like ersatz humans after a while. |
|
06 Nov 07 - 12:06 PM (#2187585) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: pdq Pam Dauber, Barbara Feldon and Mary Tyler-Moore were all moldels early in their careers, and all of them eventually became grownups. None of these ladies has the 'dead eyes' that Kate Moss and some of the other stick figures of today posess. Moss and others look more like street prostitutes than respectable women, although that may be intentional. |
|
06 Nov 07 - 12:13 PM (#2187593) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Wesley S It's just an internet rumor. |
|
06 Nov 07 - 03:28 PM (#2187764) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Stilly River Sage And how could I forget - Martha Stewart started out modeling. No doubt she earns currency from around the world, Euros included. SRS |
|
06 Nov 07 - 04:02 PM (#2187790) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk I'd damn well like to get paid in Canadian dollars by my US customers at this point too! But no chance of that. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 03:17 AM (#2188146) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Big Al Whittle Wait till world war three comes around. Then it'll be, we are poor little countries - that's why we've only spent ten bucks on defence in the last fifteen years - you rich Americans must defend us. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 09:33 AM (#2188307) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk What makes you think America will be on the "defending" side in such a war? You sound to me like A Hungarian or a Rumanian or a Finn talking supportively about Nazi Germany in 1941, and praising them for their responsible level of preparedness in the face of dire threats from evil powers such as Russia, Britain, and America. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 09:55 AM (#2188318) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk And what I mean is: Who has been invading small countries and occupying them with its high-tech armies? Who has been launching "pre-emptive" attacks. Who? Which great powers have been doing that? That tells you the whole story in a nutshell. Aggression is aggression, even if you tie a big red, white, and blue ribbon around it and call it "fighting terrorism" or "defending freedom". You don't need swastikas, goose-stepping, and Nazi salutes to practice fascism, you don't need to be German or Japanese or Italian or Russian, you just need to attack and invade others first, without any real need, and without any real justification. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 09:59 AM (#2188323) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Peace "without any real need" The need was real enough. The justification, however . . . . |
|
07 Nov 07 - 10:16 AM (#2188329) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk I don't see that there was any need to invade Afghanistan in 2001, but it's debatable. The reason I say there was no need was that the nation and government of Aghanistan did not attack the USA on 911. A hidden group of international conspirators attacked the USA on 911. It was therefore a police matter, not a military matter, and to respond to it with an all-out military attack on another nation was totally inappropriate. But like I said, it's debatable... As for Iraq, there was definitely no need to attack them in 2003. They didn't cause 911. They posed no actual threat to other countries any longer at that time. Their own country is immeasureably worse off for having been invaded and occupied, and would have been far better off if it had never been invaded by the USA and Britain, and if sanctions had been lifted following the Gulf War which effectively ended Saddam's ability to threaten his neighbours. That was way back in 1991. That should have been the end of it right there. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 11:23 AM (#2188379) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Big Al Whittle You feel what you feel. For what its worth I thought the Iraq invasion was ill considered, and I was angry when it was made clear to me how much we'd been lied to over WMD's. Nevertheless, America DO pull an awful lot of hot irons out of the fire for us. Gadaffi would still be training terrorists, if America hadn't stood up to him. Morally of course you can't say that bombing innnocent citizens is anything other than morally abhorrent. Perhaps France was right not to let the USA use their airspace. Still it achieved the object of stopping him doing stuff like the Lockerbie bombing, training IRA people and Basque separatists, etc. Think how many customers Gadaffi would have had from Osama's gang. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 12:44 PM (#2188437) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Wesley S From supermodels to war in only 13 posts. Is that a thread drift record? |
|
07 Nov 07 - 12:45 PM (#2188440) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: pdq Hardly. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 12:59 PM (#2188451) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk Hmmm. My last post vanished into hyperspace for some reason. Now you will never get to read it. Too bad. ;-) What it said, condensed, was this: The hot irons that the USA pulls out of the fire are invariably irons that were heated up in some fire that the USA itself set in the first place by its own policies since the 1950s. The USA does not have enemies out there because Third World people "hate freedom" or belong to some other religion. It has enemies because it interferes in Third World societies, arranges coups that overthrow legally elected governments, supports dictators and autocrats who tyrranize people, and because it takes over foreign economies for corporate profit, and attacks people who resist those takeovers. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 01:51 PM (#2188480) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Big Al Whittle 'From supermodels to war in only 13 posts. Is that a thread drift record?' Its about irresponsible people chipping away at the economy of the country whom we all rely on in the last instance to preserve our freedoms. Obviously some people would have been happier under Hitler, Stalin, all the other ne'er do wells, whom America soldiery has seen off for us. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 02:25 PM (#2188495) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Riginslinger "Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars..." Pay her in inches? |
|
07 Nov 07 - 06:11 PM (#2188618) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: PoppaGator As a fairly left-radical American with a long history of civil disobedience in support of varoius unpopular causes, I feel a degree of agreement with everything that Little Hawk has been writing here. But, really ~ not everything the US has done ~ or more precisely, not everything that has been done in the name of America ~ is all that wrong. Since Vietnam and up until the coronation of GW Bush, the worst tendencies of American Imperialism, and the most egregious profiteering of the military-industrial complex, have been kept under relative control. To my mind, most of weelittledrummer's retorts have been on the mark. The "war on terrorism" is real, but those knuckleheads in DC need to understand that it cannot be fought as a war against any nation-state, even those with whom we have serious differences. And it is certainly counterproductive to rain "shock and awe" upon any civilian population ~ that just proves our worst enemies to be right, and drives huge numbers of people into the opposing camp. The jihadists are essentially opposed to modern society as such, and thus to any and every modern-day government. The real war that can be fought, and perhaps should be fought, is a guerilla action best carried out in relative secrecy by small numbers of highly specialized volunteers, like the Green Berets and Navy Seals, etc., and with the guidance of intelligence experts. That's more than scary enough for me; I am not volunteering to participate, and indeed don't like the idea very much, but I think I'd have to accept it if it were to come about, albeit with reluctance. Back to the pre-drift topic ~ I suppose that I would gladly be paid in euros, too, but I don't have that option. My small-biz employer is not engaged in international commerce... |
|
07 Nov 07 - 06:47 PM (#2188640) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk Yeah, okay then, let's return to the pre-drift topic, like you say... ;-) I'd love to be paid in Euros. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 07:56 PM (#2188666) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: michaelr Gisele Bundchen is hot. |
|
07 Nov 07 - 10:30 PM (#2188710) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: JohnInKansas At the link I posted (third post in the thread) a little bit down the page, there should be a link to an "In Pictures" link where pics of all of the top 15 in the Forbes list are shown. I think several are "hotter" than Gisele, but that's just one opinion and is totally academic since none have replied to my invitations to dinner. They're mostly all too young to carry on an intelligent conversation (yesm I'm prejudiced) so perhaps it's just as well that they were too busy. John |
|
07 Nov 07 - 10:37 PM (#2188713) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: The Fooles Troupe As LH said: "The hot irons that the USA pulls out of the fire are invariably irons that were heated up in some fire that the USA itself set in the first place by its own policies since the 1950s. The USA does not have enemies out there because Third World people "hate freedom" or belong to some other religion. It has enemies because it interferes in Third World societies, arranges coups that overthrow legally elected governments, supports dictators and autocrats who tyrranize people, and because it takes over foreign economies for corporate profit, and attacks people who resist those takeovers." I just say 'Pakistan'... :-) |
|
07 Nov 07 - 11:30 PM (#2188729) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Stilly River Sage Hardly. Nah, we haven't had the punishment of his presence yet. He has been a model of circumspection. SRS |
|
07 Nov 07 - 11:40 PM (#2188732) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: number 6 Staying within the boundries regarding the topic of this thread (well sorta) .... isn't anyone gonna throw mud at the Italians? biLL |
|
08 Nov 07 - 03:43 AM (#2188778) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Deckman What's a Euro? Bob(deckman)Nelson |
|
08 Nov 07 - 10:47 AM (#2188990) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk A Euro is a Eurodollar. It is the currency used by the European Union, and it's a very strong currency these days. |
|
08 Nov 07 - 11:08 AM (#2189007) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Peace What kind of people deal in human flesh? |
|
08 Nov 07 - 11:11 AM (#2189010) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Wesley S Politicians? And the armed forces that they use? |
|
08 Nov 07 - 11:18 AM (#2189019) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Peace And modelling agencies? And pimps? |
|
08 Nov 07 - 11:29 AM (#2189032) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk And agencies that supply "mail-order" brides and domestic staff from the Phillipines and other places in Asia? |
|
08 Nov 07 - 11:29 AM (#2189033) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: number 6 Especially those greedy haute coutre houses in Milan and Rome. A threat to the free world ... starving young girls and turning them onto drugs and the disco highlife ..... they are nothing but big powerful cartels conspiring to devalue the U.S. $dollar$ by forcing the housewives of Miami, Beverly Hills, New york to spend, spend, spend big $bucks$ .. charging for their designer wear on credit cards ... forcing the upper middle class to get in debt. These haute coutre houses are nothing but organized jackels of the Vatican. biLL |
|
08 Nov 07 - 11:49 AM (#2189048) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Little Hawk Oh, we're really getting into some juicy stuff now, aren't we? ;-) |
|
08 Nov 07 - 12:20 PM (#2189074) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Donuel The great statue of American fairness wisdom dominance and economic power has feet of clay and is cracking from the ground up. Even the Chinese goverment official that said that maybe they should invest in other currencies was a low level person who is merely saying what everyone already knows. |
|
08 Nov 07 - 09:57 PM (#2189454) Subject: RE: BS: Supermodel: Don't Pay Me In Dollars From: Ron Davies To return to the topic a bit. Gisele's dislike of pay in dollars is "...just an internet rumor". Not exactly. Now if it had come from an internet site-- say, Mudcat, for instance-- it would be an internet rumor., Source however was Bloomberg, one of the premier sources of financial information. Perhaps not quite on the level of the Wall St Journal, but close. The WSJ also discussed the item, but used "reportedly", as I recall. I can get the exact phrasing, if there's interest. Also, here are 2 possible interpretations: 1) "Euros instead of dollars" originated with an unknown person in Brazil who just wanted to make a splash--therefore totally false. This is the official line of Gisele's spokespeople now. 2) Either she or a spokesman did say it but her handlers saw the immediate backlash--as indicated in Fox News, for instance which reacted: "I say P & G should dump Gisele and instead hire an American model who appreciates the Ohio-based company's business and is happy to take our currency. I'm sure an American model's hair is just as nice". So there was a bit of backpedalling. As an article I saw put it: "Retract, deny, rinse, repeat". But the idea is no more an " internet rumor" than Janet Cooke's Washington Post articles were "print rumors" . And at least it provided a jumping-off point for a discussion here. |